terrorist
ter·ror·ist [ térrərist ] (plural ter·ror·ists)
noun
Definition:
somebody using violence for political purposes: somebody who uses violence, especially bombing, kidnapping, and assassination, to intimidate others, often for political purposes
anarchist
an·ar·chist [ ánnərkist ] (plural an·ar·chists)
noun
Definition:
1. supporter of anarchism: somebody who believes that governments should be abolished as unnecessary
2. lawless person: somebody who tries to overthrow a government or behaves in a lawless way
Okay, you have seen the title of this particular post. You have read the two definitions above. Now go to Vegas police find deadly ricin in motel room if you want a clue as to all of this, and to see where I found the quote in the above title. You can also go to Police: Firearms, 'Anarchist Textbook' Found in Ricin Hotel Room" to read more about it. After you read those two articles, about a man in the hospital apparently suffering from Ricin poisoning, riddle me this Batman:
1. Is there any possible link to terrorist activity?
2. Should the man who is in the hospital be a suspect, at least a preliminary suspect, in this case in that he should be suspected of possessing Ricin? Note I am not saying he is guilty, I am asking should he be suspected of such, even if the suspicion is tentative and will depend in the long run on further information being developed to keep him as a suspect?
If the police truly believe that there is no, and I mean absolutely no link to possible terrorist activity here, I think they are screwballs, and should literally be demoted or fired. Here read the quote to which I refer:
“There is no information to lead us to believe that this is the result of any terrorist activity or related to any possible terrorist activity,”
What do they mean by that? Are they idiots or are they just trying to keep people from panicking? My guess is they are well trained idiots acting at the behest of higher authority; but I could be wrong, and it is possible they are just idiots of the plain and simple type. Why? Well because:
1. Ricin is an extremely toxic chemical agent with few legitimate uses except in cancer research.
2.Certainly there was absolutely no legitimate cancer research going on, and no legitimate use use for it, in a
3. An "anarchist type textbook" (from the MSN article) was found in the motel room when authorities searched the room. The book is tabbed at a certain page, that page containing information about how to make
4. Firearms were found in that room (no not even indicative of a crime on their own, but they can add to suspicion of criminal activity when certain other things fall into place).
5. A man has been hospitalized with symptoms of Ricin poisoning, the same man who had been staying in the room where the above items were found.
6. Authorities seized the "anarchist type textbook" and the firearms, but the vials of Ricin in the plastic bag were not discovered when the book and guns were found. This sort of implies that the police searched the room when or once the 2 seized items were found, or that they certainly should have searched the room if those items had been discovered by someone other than LEOs.
7. Authorities seize the book and weapons.
8. A friend of the hospitalized man, went to the motel room in question, to pick up the belongings of the hospitalized man, and this friend reportedly finds the vials of Ricin in a plastic bag in said room.
9. The first man has been in the hospital since February 14.
10. The weapons and the guns were found on or about Tuesday February February 19.
11. The vials were only found on or about Thursday, February 21.
12. On February 22 the friend, who went to the hospitalized man's room to pick up his belongings, contacted motel management to inform them there were pets in said room.
13. "A dog was found dead but the animal had gone at least a week without food or water, Suey said" This quote from the FoxNews article. I imagine that dog (unlucky 13) was found dead by authorities or by the motel management on the 22 or later, and am basing my conclusion on number 12 above. (Where were the police in regard to this earlier?)
14. "Along with the ricin, police found castor beans possibly used to make the substance. Suey said the manufacture of ricin is a crime." Again from FoxNews.
15. We don't know an awful lot about him," Suey said. "We don't even know that it was him that was in possession of the ricin" That would be Deputy Chief of Police Kathy Suey to whom that quote was attributed in the FoxNews article.
16. Suey apparently made her statements yesterday.
I ask you again to consider:
1. Is there any
2. Should the man who is in the hospital be a suspect, at least a preliminary suspect, in this case in that he should be suspected of possessing Ricin? Note I am not saying he is guilty, I am asking should he be suspected of such, even if the suspicion is tentative and will depend in the long run on further information being developed to keep him as a suspect?
If you are uncertain, or if you answered "No" to either of those 2 questions, you are far from correct as I see it.
There is a POSSIBLE link to, or suspicion of, terrorist activity. This would be based upon the evidence that manufacture of Ricin is a crime, a man has been hospitalized with apparent Ricin poisoning (either intentionally or accidentally poisoned it does not matter), the Ricin apparently was kept under unsafe conditions in a motel room, in that same motel room were firearms (not by themselves an indicator of crime by a long shot mind you), and in that room was found an "anarchist type textbook". Ricin is most often associated with terrorists when not used legitimately. By now, even by yesterday, it is/was probably very apparent to the Las Vegas Police brass, and others involved in this case, that the Ricin in said room was not there for legitimate purposes.
Let's examine a for just a moment now the other legitimate uses of Ricin beyond cancer research. Hmm, zero! So with no legitimate uses of Ricin save cancer research, what nefarious uses of Ricin are there? It has been used to kill people in political assassinations carried out by terrorists. In fact an extremely small amount of Ricin, in its purest forms, is required to kill someone. But let me not bore you with what I know about the subject, let me give you just a smidgen of what the CDC says about it here:
"It would take a deliberate act to make ricin and use it to poison people. Accidental exposure to ricin is highly unlikely.
People can breathe in ricin mist or powder and be poisoned.
Ricin can also get into water or food and then be swallowed.
Pellets of ricin, or ricin dissolved in a liquid, can be injected into people’s bodies.
Depending on the route of exposure (such as injection or inhalation), as little as 500 micrograms of ricin could be enough to kill an adult. A 500-microgram dose of ricin would be about the size of the head of a pin. A greater amount would likely be needed to kill people if the ricin were swallowed.
In 1978, Georgi Markov, a Bulgarian writer and journalist who was living in London, died after he was attacked by a man with an umbrella. The umbrella had been rigged to inject a poison ricin pellet under Markov’s skin.
Some reports have indicated that ricin may have been used in the Iran-Iraq war during the 1980s and that quantities of ricin were found in Al Qaeda caves in Afghanistan.
Ricin poisoning is not contagious. It cannot be spread from person to person through casual contact. "
Are you getting the picture? Ricin is a deadly chemical, extremely deadly, and it is often associated with terrorists and terrorism. There are few legitimate uses of it, all centering around cancer research. This Ricin was not found in a cancer research facility, and in fact was found with a bag of Castor beans (the source from which Ricin can be manufactured, and it is very unlikely that a cancer researcher would leave either lying around his motel room). Do I watch too much television, or do I just have too much experience with criminals, when I think that Ricin in a motel room would be highly suspicious of wrongdoing, and its former links to terrorists in combination with firearms and an "anarchist's type textbook" add up to a suspicion of terrorist activity? Look to the link to the CDC web page about Ricin. At least glance over it, read each section's header. Look at the size of each section on the article the CDC wrote about Ricin. Which is the largest section? Yes the one about how to protect yourself from Ricin as if a terrorist attack had taken place. Remember, as seen above, they said it would take a deliberate act to spread enough to harm people. Any suspicions yet?
How can the police NOT BE at least SUSPICIOUS that this was in some POSSIBLE way linked to terrorism? How can the police not believe that the man who was poisoned is at least a suspect in this case? I said a suspect, nothing more, and I mean nothing less such as the
Of course as I mentioned above, they could be
As for you and me, it is good to be aware of such thing, and how to react and act after a suspected spread of Ricin (hint: a terrorist attack using Ricin). There are oodles and oodles of websites that give you such info, so I will not go into any such readiness preparations here; however I will recommend you start with the links on the CDC webpage that covers Ricin. Just suffice it to say, you should be prepared for terrorist attacks because in all likelihood they are coming. No this may well not have been one, and if it was supposed to have resulted in one chances are it maybe would have been small scale. Though we do not know the size of the "vials" vials are usually pretty small, so let's say a scale like a suicide bombing killing dozens of innocent people. Still though, a larger attack to come is probably almost a certainty. No not necessarily with Ricin, or other biological or chemical agents, it could be nuclear, it could be a regular bomb or IEDS, it could be gunshots, it could be a maniac mowing people down with a car. The thing is you should have some sort of a plan what to do if a terrorist attack occurs; and if anything happens that has even half the evidence that it is a terrorist attack as the example above, you should suspect it is just that - a terrorist attack - and you take appropriate action to protect yourself and your loved ones.
Now maybe I am just the overly suspicious type, but that's my slant on it all. Oh, before I leave you for now, did I forget to mention: Maybe the police ought to read up on the definitions of anarchist versus terrorist. Pretty darned similar are they not? No suspicions ineed!
All the best,
Glenn B
